Civil court jurisdiction is barred under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, impacting injunctions and proceedings.

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)

How to determine whether the Civil Court has jurisdiction under Section 34 SARFAESI Act when an ex-parte proceeding and injunction were issued?

What is the appropriate remedy when a party challenges an ex-parte order under Article 227 in light of Section 34 SARFAESI Act?

What are the conditions under which a Civil Court may exercise jurisdiction despite the bar imposed by Section 34 SARFAESI Act, particularly in cases alleging fraud?

JUDGMENT :

Vikram Aggarwal, J.

The instant petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails the order dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P.1) passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Faridabad vide which the defence of the petitioner was struck off and the operation of notice dated 11.02.2025 regarding possession proceedings initiated qua suit house, was stayed.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts as emanating from the revision petition are that one Kuljeet Singh and Jasbir Kaur (since deceased), availed a loan of Rs.45,86,854/- from the petitioner and the requisite loan agreement was executed. Property bearing No. 1/727 measuring 100 square yards situated in Block-C, Raja Garden Colony, Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit property') was mortgaged with the petitioner at the time of availing the aforesaid loan.

3. For, the borrowers failed to adhere to the repayment plan and started making default, the account was classified as a Non Performing Asset (NPA) on 24.03.2021. The borrowers namely Jasbir Kaur expired on 22.01.2017 and Kuljeet Singh expired on 11.09.2020.

4. A sum of Rs.29,83,105/- was received by the petitioner on 24.06.2021 from the insurance amount of Kuljeet Singh. After adjusting the said amount, a sum of Rs.33,45,705.29, was outstanding as on 30.06.2021.

5. Proceedings under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (for short 'the SARFAESI Act ') were initiated. A demand notice dated 12.06.2021 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was initially issued, which was subsequently recalled and a fresh demand notice dated 10.03.2023 (Anneuxre P.2) was issued to the legal heirs of Jasbir Kaur and Kuljeet Singh, calling upon them to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.41,99,030.44 within a period of 60 days.

6. No objections are stated to have been received against the said demand notice. Symbolic possession of the property in dispute was taken on 30.05.2023 (Annexure P.3).

7. A sale notice dated 23.06.2023 with regard to the property in dispute was issued which did not evoke any response. Pursuant to that, another sale notice dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure P.4) was issued. The property in dispute was sold by way of auction for Rs.50,50,000/- in favour of the auction purchaser.

8. An application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act , was filed pursuant to which order dated 07.11.2024 (Annexure P.5) was passed by the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad. Possession notice dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure P.6) was, therefore, issued.

9. CWP-937-2025 was instituted by the respondent (Rajender Kaur). In the said writ petition, a stand was taken that a relinquishment deed dated 17.09.2010 had been executed by Rajender Kaur, Jasbir Kaur and Rajwant Kaur, out of their own free will in favour of Kuljeet Singh, as a result of which he had become absolute owner of the property in dispute. The writ petition was withdrawn on 16.01.2025 (Annexure P.8). Liberty was, however, granted to the respondent to take recourse to the alternative remedies, in accordance with law.

10. When efforts were made to obtain physical possession of the property in dispute, hindrance was created by the respondent, as a result of which, an application was again filed by the petitioner in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad and vide order dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P.9), a direction was issued to the DCP, Central, Faridabad, to ensure compliance of the order.

11. The respondent preferred Civil Suit No. 678-2025 titled as Rajender Kaur Vs. M/s Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, wherein a new stan